Labour MPs are concerned that Tony Blair’s sweeping 12-point plan for tackling the threat posed by Islamist terrorism may hinder the very goals he seeks to achieve.

A former Home Office minister, the level-headed John Denham who now chairs the home affairs select committee, has expressed dismay that the government has abandoned the cross-party approach it pursued after the London bombings.

“The government responded to the bombings initially with a very measured approach, a very serious approach, good coordination across government,” he told the BBC.

“The last few days really give this sense that the government have got into a real state of nerves about the whole thing; it is displaying a lack of confidence in its own strategy and I think they’ve got to get a grip on it very, very quickly, stop floating half-baked ideas and get back to proper cross-party consensus on the serious measures that need to be taken.”

Labour backbenchers fear that Mr Blair is responding to tabloid criticism, exacerbated by militant comments on BBC Newsnight last week, and doing what he often does for good and ill – prodding a cautious Home Office into taking what may prove unwise steps.

What they see as Mr Blair “grabbing the agenda before it grabs him”, No 10 regards as a prudent attempt to address voters’ legitimate feelings. “Why the hell can’t we do something about these people?” as one senior MP puts it.

Guardian, 9 August 2005

See also Independent, 9 August 2005

I agree with the two Muslim MPs who oppose the banning of Hizb ut-Tahrir (Islamist clerics face treason charges, August 8). As a scholar who has some knowledge of their operations in the UK and abroad, I am convinced their modus operandi is through traditional political campaigning, not violence. Believing that nation states in the Middle East are artificial creations of western powers to divide Muslims and exploit oil resources, they seek social justice through the formation of a single Islamic state that serves the poor rather than corrupt clients of foreign powers. They argue that violence cannot be used to take control of the state, but the state can use the military to defend itself against other states.

As a political geographer and Christian socialist, I believe their historical analysis is correct and their conclusion well-reasoned. I cannot share their vision, for it ultimately maintains the Quranic commitment to just war theory that is as much part of the Middle East’s problems as the variants deployed by George Bush and Tony Blair. However, they are not terrorists and parliament must resist this unreasonable attack on freedom of speech.
Dr Nick Megoran
Cambridge University

Letter in Guardian, 9 August 2005

After Prime Minister Tony Blair’s announcement that Hizb ut-Tahrir would be proscribed as a terrorist organisation, many Muslim and non-Muslim groups and personalities have expressed amazement and shock that a non-violent political party could be targeted in this manner. Moreover several UK national newspapers and leaked government documents have revealed that even the UK Home Office has stated that Hizb ut-Tahrir is not a terrorist party or a violent organisation.

Dr Imran Waheed, Media Representative of Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain, said, “Since the statement of the Prime Minister, we have received dozens of messages of support from leading Muslim and non-Muslim groups and personalities. Not everyone may agree with our politics but everyone agrees that banning a non-violent political party is injustice and will set a very dangerous precedent.”

Hizb ut-Tahrir press release, 9 August 2005

Tony Blair’s plans to counter radical Islamism include a legal ban on the Hizb-ut-Tahrir party. Abdul Wahid, a member of its executive committee, responds.

Open Democracy, 9 August 2005

The Guardian has learned that a radical Muslim group, Hizb ut-Tahrir, which the prime minister intends to ban, is not involved in violence or terrorism, according to a leaked unpublished government report prepared for Tony Blair.

Two of Labour’s four Muslim MPs yesterday told the Guardian that they oppose banning Hizb ut-Tahrir, as announced on Friday by the prime minister as part of a package of measures to tackle extremism after the bombing attacks on London last month.

Shahid Malik, MP for Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, told the Guardian that he thought banning the group could be a mistake. Mr Malik is one of four Labour Muslim MPs who have met Mr Blair to discuss how to crack down on extremism. He said: “By banning them their ideas are still there, but unanswered. British Muslims must intellectually confront these ideas.”

Sadiq Khan, MP for Tooting, has been targeted by the group’s activists. Mr Khan, a civil rights lawyer, said: “I dislike immensely Hizb ut-Tahrir and despise some of their activists, but nothing I’ve seen or experienced amounts to them inciting violence. There’s no justification for a ban, and people are saying it’s an example of double standards as there is no plan to ban the British National party.”

Last year a paper, called Young Muslims and Extremism, was prepared for Mr Blair on the orders of the home and foreign secretaries. It says: “Most of the structured organisations, eg Hizb ut-Tahrir, will not directly advocate violence. Indeed membership or sympathy with such an organisation does not in any way presuppose a move towards terrorism.”

Guardian, 8 August 2005

The leaked Young Muslims and Extremism paper is available here.